Talk:Ku Klux Klan (honor society)

Massive Rework of "Systemic racism and campus legacy" section needed.
IMO, if it deals directly with the honor society, it belongs including those for whom the confusion caused issues in their legacies, it should be here, but in *no* way does something like Unite the Right belong as a specific mention.Naraht (talk) 18:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I agree. It looks like the forgotten group was brought to recent attention in both Wisconsin and Illinois upon finding the Ku Klux Klan in old yearbooks. It makes more sense to focus on the campus controversies and the outcomes of those discussions in this section (there is already a source written by a chancellor on the subject). I am fine with a paragraph putting the group into a racist historical context but that needs to be done carefully as this is mostly speculation other than the implications of the society's name. That is, the society could just as easily be a group of stupid college students who thought the name was funny based on our limited knowledge of their activities. For example, wearing black robes is more of a connection to GLOs than to the KKK; I have already repositioned that content to remove that inference. Rublamb (talk) 19:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I have updated the lower section which had inserted a severely biased analysis of the creation and existence of this short-lived society. It had framed this as a bellwether or indicator of "systemic racism" within Honor societies, which was clearly a misreading. Honor societies, and the many general fraternities and sororities have typically been on the forefront of cultural change toward a more inclusive and welcoming stance toward the rapidly increasing ranks of college-track minorities, along with advancement of women as full participants in Greek life and the shift to a coeducational model for honor societies, and the breakdown of religious barriers to entry. The section is now more consistent with the historical record. Jax MN (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Name of Article
I believe the article's name needs to be changed. It should be Ku Klux Klan (honor society) or Ku Klux Klan (collegiate) as it does not appear to have ever used the full name of Ku Klux Klan Honor Society. However, there is another possibility to consider. It was called KKK for 17 years and had 5 chapters and Tu-Mas for at least 16 years with 13 chapters. Normally, wouldn't we consider the latter name to be the one to use? Rublamb (talk) 19:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I support a name change. Dissecting each of the options:
 * Tu-Mas may be the best choice, not because it hides its origin from the days when it used the KKK name, but that the society became significantly larger under that new name. This is a very common rationale for our naming rules. The old name can be a redirect.
 * Ku Klux Klan (honor society) may be OK, and certainly would be a good redirect, as it differentiates from the main Ku Klux Klan article.
 * Ku Klux Klan (collegiate) is the worst choice, as it (incorrectly) leads one to think that this collegiate entity is a subordinate branch of the KKK. These two organizations never seemed to have any administrative nor legal connection; only the stupid use of the same name in an early branding endeavor.  Perhaps a blatant rip-off, in those days before aggressive copyright fights. Jax MN (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I still cannot find proof of the 13 chapters except for the Wisconsin yearbook. At the same time, the Illinois yearbook says two active chapters. Noting that the badge includes the number 13, I wonder if there were 13 chapters of KKK, with five being active when its name changed (per a newspaper article), and only two surviving into the future. Hard to say because KKK is difficult to search. I can only find newspaper articles on Tu-Mas or Tumas from the two colleges. Rublamb (talk) 01:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * The name is the notable part of this society. It is what causes all of the debate and articles throughout colleges and news sources alive.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiObjectivity (talk • contribs) 16:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @WikiObjectivity: The current name of the article was not ever the name of the society which is why the article's name needs to be corrected. If you are proposing that KKK needs to continue to be part of the article's name, do you have preference as to the way we correct its name? I have made two suggestions; there might be another option. Also, to determine the best name for the article we have to look at the name in relationship to naming conventions for GLOs and honor society articles, not just a few recent news stories. MOS dictates that an organization's common name is used for an article; we have to look at the number of chapters under each name, the duration (number of years) of each name, the number of members initiated under each name, and media coverage under each name. Rublamb (talk) 16:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I see your point and agree with "Ku Klux Klan (honor society)." That is the most fitting to properly address the notable topic of this society while sticking closest to the actual naming convention. WikiObjectivity (talk) 00:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Jax MN: Are you okay with was @WikiObjectivity says, or do we need to follow WP and MOS guidelines for using the most current/most common name. I don't care but do not want to get slapped by Admin for not thinking through a name change. Rublamb (talk) 16:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , I think is correct here.  Renaming it "Ku Klux Klan (honor society)" is best, in this specific situation.  The notability (or notoriety) of this group hinges entirely on the KKK name.  If we renamed the article as "Tu-Mas" or some derivative I think others could fairly claim we are attempting to hide the tainted origin of the group. Jax MN (talk) 16:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for helping to reach consensus. Moving now. Rublamb (talk) 16:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's reasonable to make a REDIRECT too, for Tu-Mas. Did you? Jax MN (talk) 16:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks for the reminder. Rublamb (talk) 17:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Formation
Good research recently... How ought we square this statement in the lede:
 * It was not affiliated with the national Ku Klux Klan organization but its name reflected broader societal attitudes and the prevalence of systemic racism during that period.

with this following statement, shown later in the History section?:
 * In 1922, the reformed or Second Ku Klux Klan established a fraternity chapter at the University of Wisconsin.

Was this 1922 chapter at Wisconsin connected to the earlier formed (May, 1919) KKK honor society? Or instead, was it an attempt to form a general collegiate or social fraternity with a similar name only three years later? Jax MN (talk) 14:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The Condon reference answers this, so the body text should be clarified. (I will do so.) It makes clear that the 1922 club was formed by the Klan and one may infer, was subordinate to the national Klan, and thus was NOT connected to the 1919-formed chapter of the ill-named honor society.  The referenced article recounts the fascinating story of Fredric March, a film icon, civil rights advocate, and community leader whose name was unfairly tarnished by his simply being tapped by the 1919-formed honor society for recognition. The general (social) fraternity into which he sought membership and which he joined was Alpha Delta Phi; it is likely that the KKK named honor society sought him out to tap him for (or ~grant) membership, as was the norm for honor societies. Jax MN (talk) 15:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)